Social mobility and grammar schools

Lillie Yes they still have sitzen bleiben and it is a life saver for boys in middle of puberty. Many famous men have repeated a year and my son in law -a self employed successful economist also put in an extra year

@Eloethan

Great post. Not surprisingly, I agree with you.

It's also worth mentioning that the 1944 Education Act was designed for a society which no longer exists. At the time, Britain was still a manufacturing country, so it was believed that about 20-25% would go on to white collar/managerial jobs and, therefore, the liberal education provided by the grammar schools was appropriate for them.

The basic 'three Rs' plus a bit of vocational training was considered appropriate for the rest, because employers provided apprenticeships and appropriate vocational training. We also still had a tradition of 'night school' for those who wanted to develop specific work-based skills.

The world has changed. The UK no longer has 80% of its workforce engaged in manufacturing or manual labour (skilled or non-skilled). We don't actually know what current pupils will be doing in 50 or 60 years, but we do need to educate them to be flexible and to use their brains, in a way that secondary mod pupils were never taught to do.

@MargaretX

I worked for a year as an assistant in a Gymnasium and attended one of the 'Konferenzen' when it was decided which pupils should 'sitzenbleiben' or be advised to go to a Realschule. It was all quite brutal.

As an English assistant, I was much in demand for 'Nachhilfestunden' with more affluent parents who wanted their children to avoid repeating a year.

Perhaps I passed the Scholarship and not the 11+ but it amounted to the same thing. We were about 40 in the junior school class divided into 3 long rows of tables. The top row, the second snd the bottom row.And then that in three classes top middle and bottom.
As I kept my place at the top table in the top class in this working class area, I worked out that I would pass the scholarship. So I was under no stress and even enjoyed it.
Some children suffered the reverse and their lives were scarred by the whole procedure

This has to be considered carefully bfore the grammarschools are brought back.

@granjura

Oh yes! I'd forgotten about the Ugandan Asians. My son's best friend comes from a Ugandan Asian family, who originally settled in Leicester. They were highly aspirational and why shouldn't they have been? They had come from wealthy backgrounds and wanted the best for their children. The father of my son's best friend now runs a highly successful independent supermarket chain here in Essex. His daughter went to LSE and works for one of the biggest accountancy firms. His son has an offer from Oxford, which he will almost certainly be able to accept (waiting for A level results).

One of my private pupils comes from a Nigerian family and it's the same story.

Don't let anybody tell me that immigrants haven't brought energy and advantages to the UK!

I really feel this thread should be renamed the bragging thread!

Indeed.

I spent a term on teacher exchange in East Berlin, well Berlin a couple of years after the wall came down- in a Realschule, in the Summer term. Two of the friends of some of the kids in my class, who had made it to the Gymnasium the previous year- were told they couldn't stay as their grades were too low. They climbed to the school roof and jumped- as they felt their lives would be ruined forever. So tragic.

As a child I also lost a school friend who had failed the year and would have to 'redoubler' - he jumped into the river and was sept away.

Bragging - I hope you won't consider my last post as 'bragging'- what a bizarre comment.

@Margaret5X

I was the same. I lived in the suburb of a working class area. There were 50 in my primary school class with no teaching assistant. It sounds amazing that there were so many of us, but I have a number of class photos and have counted them. We were the top class (out of two) and I was on the top table. I think there were about eight of us. It was a very progressive 1960s school and we bounced ideas off each other with little teacher intervention. All of us passed the 11+ to direct grant schools. It wasn't until much later that I realised that not all humans were like us.

Bragging, ie., my iq is better than yours

@Nannylovesshopping

I'm sorry if you feel that this is a bragging thread. I really haven't meant to brag, but I felt I needed to defend myself when people claimed that people who support comprehensive schools are 'jealous'.

My children have received a great education within the comprehensive system and they have friends who have gone on to all sorts of futures.

When I first started teaching, people thought I would look for jobs in grammar and independent schools, because that was my background. I was adamant that I wanted to work in a comprehensive school. I admit that it was a steep learning curve. I had never come across people who didn't think education wasn't important or people who didn't have the same values that I had.

I don't think that the UK has its priorities regarding education right. There are too many people, like Gove, who think that all pupils should have a grammar school-type education. If I had a magic wand (which is a dream, because I will never have) I would abolish all selective and faith schools and look towards the Finnish model of providing great schools for all.

Finland has a population of only 5.5 million, so that would be a much simpler task than in England and Wales.

Not necessarily, TriciaF, but it would take a very brave government to abolish all grammar and faith schools. I doubt very much if it will happen in my lifetime. The British are too fond of hanging in to privilege and nostalgia.

The issue in the OP is that there are pressure groups who want to expand grammar school provision, when the trend should be the reverse, if the UK wants a truly world class education system.

There has been some IQ boasting going on here, plus references to children who have their own law firm etc. All very unnecessary when he subject being discussed is the possibility of a return to an outdated education system that disadvantaged many children from the age of 11.

We should focus on improving our excellent comprehensive system. Smaller classes in both primary and high schools. Widen opportunities to link to apprenticeships for older children but don't deny them the broad education needed.

Iagree with both daphne and Iam.
We do not need to go back to a system that failed the majority of children.
In the fifties and sixties, there was a need for more people working in factories or even down the mines. We did not need the majority to be educated to a high standard.
Where is our manufacturing base now? More people work in te service industry than in manufacturing.
I heard someone say on the radio this morning about the Hinkley Point reactor that we have missed the opportunity of buying a reactor that works, from South Korea!
Why do we not have our own engineers to build reactors if that's what we want?
What happened to our education system that we cannot even think of doing this ourselves?
Haven't we just voted to be more self sufficient, yet we have to rely on China or South Korea for our power?

I suspect the answer is because we don't invest enough in training durhamjen, same with nurses, midwives etc. It's 'cheaper' to import them from poorer countries who have invested in their training.
It's also true that because of the decrease in our manufacturing base, fewer young people were able to access good quality apprenticeships. Remember schemes like the YTS which provided very poor 'training' for young people, rather than the high quality apprenticeships.
Things are improving. One of my grandchildren managed, after A levels and two years of searching, to find an specific engineering apprenticeship. He was lucky, a friend's father introduced him to the small firm. I know several entrepreneurial young folks who have apprentices working with them, hairdressing, beauty therapy, gardening for example. It's a great way for young people to learn a skilled trade and also allow them to grow up with good role models around them.
Our young people will be working into their 70's I expect. Let's allow them longer in the education system than leaving school at 15 because they weren't "bright" enough for the grammar schools.

Wales is not under English rule for education ,

Iam64 yes but if you were, are , one of those advantaged by the grammar school system, as I was, then you would want that for your own children or grandchildren.
Wouldn't you ?

No person would want their children to benefit from any system which hurts other children surely?

Iam64,

I wonder if your point re bragging about a law firm referred to a previous post of my own.If so I would like to clarify.
It was not bragging.
I am very much in favour of grammar schools,but my SISTER went to a comprehensive and now runs her own law firm(small and just managing to pay staff wages currently).She had no advantages and came from a council estate.
My comment was to support the fact that some pupils can do very well in the comprehensive system,WITHOUT going to a grammar.

If it was not my comment,I apologise.

Exactly Annie. BBevan - no I wouldn't. What I would want is an excellent system for all children, not just the few. In 'our' day- the only alternative (apart from private of course) was going to a Sec Mod- which were great for some kids- and a disaster for others. Now if we only were prepared to properly fund our excellent Comprehensive schools- so kids could be setted properly in decent size classes- then wouldn't it be wonderful? It is a CHOICE ... and as said, as long as the affluent and influent can opt out of poorer schools, no pressure nor finance will be provided... I'm alright Jack and so are my kids, so there....

If you think a good education for all is too expensive - try ignorance and see where that leads. Nobody will be winners in that race.

I have looked at the Finnish school model Daphnedill and agree that it is quite enviable.
We have 8.5 million children in school though,and it would be a major undertaking to adopt it ,though I notice the states are keen on it too.
They have a sprinkling of faith and Steiner schools which are run independently but financed by the government.
Reading about it,I do wish it was here.

We don't invest in training, iam but this is nothing new. We've been bleating on about the lack of bricklayers for as long as I can remember. And we still are.

The reason? Casualisation of the labour force staring with Thatcher and allowed to continue, meaning no one takes responsibility for training of youngsters.

The response? Employ cheap, ready trained immigrant labour, of course!

We need so badly to invest in trades, but persist in painting academic education as some sort of educational holy grail.

We need to move on from that way of thinking and sharpish.

I'd rather see dd as a fully-employed plumber or brickie than an out-of-work lawyer or academic like me.

gettingonabit.

I totally agree.

So agree about lack of training for the trades- some of the apprenticeships are just not worth the paper they are written on. Here in Switzerland, and in Germany too- apprenticeships are really well organised and supervised, over a period of 3 to 4 years- and are really well respected. Young adults can go on to become 'Masters' in their Trade and trainers if they wish- or can link up to Maturité/ät again, and then go on to Uni the longer route if they wish. Trades are also well protected- and if you want work done to your house/business/council, etc - it has to be supplied by someone who has the necessary Trade qualifications or it won't pass muster.

Again, it is a CHOICE.